The South Carolina General Assembly: The Changing Demographic Characteristics of a Southern Legislature from 1970-1996
W. Taft Matney, Jr. & Chad C. Mercer
University of South Carolina - Spartanburg
Presented: April 22, 1997
The authors of this paper would like to extend their acknowledgment and appreciation to:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Data and Methods
Demographic Backgrounds of Other State Legislatures
Demographic Shifts in the South Carolina General Assembly
Conclusion
Works Cited
Introduction
"The breezes of change blowing across South Carolina's traditionalistic political culture also stir within the General Assembly. Although its practices and attitudes change slowly, new patterns of partisan representation, greater diversity in the membership, greater professionalism in the legislative process, and new leadership have led to a legislative body that at least looks different from the mid-century description by V.O. Key, Jr." (Graham and Moore, 1994). Portions of this assertion will be considered throughout this paper.
In his 1949 survey, Southern Politics in State and Nation, Key referred to government in the Palmetto State as a "legislative government" by declaring, "The legislature has grasped firm control of the critical sectors of state administration," (p150-1). According to previously literature this seems to hold true as Key noted that it was indeed the members of the General Assembly who elected and appointed the most important agency and department directors. Often in South Carolina government, those legislators who left offices in the House or Senate were elected by former colleagues to hold directorships in state agencies. Indisputably, this has been a major method for choosing chief governmental authorities in South Carolina. Such attrition from the legislative branch of state government allows for new individuals to enter the system bringing with them different backgrounds and experiences.
The South Carolina General Assembly is the most important institution in the determination of policy for South Carolina. Key states, "... it is the legislature, and primarily the Senate, that gives direction, coherence, and continuity to the policy of the state," (1949, p152). Therefore, it is important for us to examine who holds this power. Historically, the legislature has been dominated by white, Democratic, rural, male attorneys from South Carolina. The growing trend however, seems to be toward a more diversified group.
The purpose of this study is to examine the changing demography of the South Carolina General Assembly from the convening of the legislative sessions for the years 1970 to 1996. This study will consist of analysis of attributes of General Assembly members (in each chamber) in terms of gender, race, political party affiliations, places of birth, and occupations. Our contention is the characteristics of the members of the South Carolina House of Representatives and Senate have shifted over the past twenty-seven years to demonstrate a more heterogeneous mixture of construction. We feel that the demographics of the legislative members no longer openly exhibit the stereotypical South Carolina white male Democratic attorney.
We present an overview of legislatures in other Southern states; North Carolina and Texas will be considered. Comparisons to other assemblies are included for the sole purpose of illustrating amounts of change of South Carolina in relation to its neighboring Southern states. Doing so will establish a point of reference or a benchmark by which to measure characteristic shifts in South Carolina's legislature. We will also examine some of the shifts in the demographics of South Carolina's General Assembly as a basis of understanding the changes of the past two and one-half decades.
The South Carolina General Assembly is changing to a more heterogeneous composition, and it is important to understand not only that, but how it is changing in relation to other state legislatures as well. These are the topics which will be considered through the course of this paper.
Data and Methods
The data included in this paper are compiled from previous research done on subjects of certain Southern legislative compositions over time. The bulk of this examination, which consists of demographic movements in the South Carolina General Assembly, gained data via searches of the South Carolina Legislative Manual from various years including and between the years 1970-1996.
We note that there is an important consideration which must be made prior to disseminating any of this information. Due to time constraints and lack of research resources, there are some informational gaps in charting the physical composition of the South Carolina General Assembly in specific years. Areas in explanation, graphing, and analysis which exhibit the message "N/A" denote that the information of a member in a particular category has been omitted either by the legislative member or the editor of the South Carolina Legislative Manual.
Certain categories within the overall analysis of the South Carolina legislature have been condensed for the ease of the reader. For example, the occupation "Business" includes (but is not limited to): real estate agents, service station owners, trailer park operators, and textile company vice-presidents. Also, within the category of "Occupation," legislative members listed as either "Full-Time," "Retired," or with no listing have been condensed into a "Retired/FT Legislator" occupation. Collapsing the categorical areas as such will mask the psychological motivation of particular members during service to the legislature, but an overall sense of change can still be understood.
Demographic Backgrounds of Other State Legislatures
There has been a seemingly dramatic demographic shift in the past three decades in Southern legislatures. Two states which reflect this political demographic shift are North Carolina and Texas.
Texas
As illustrated in The Government and Politics of Texas, "For example, the number of black House members increased in that period (1971-1977) from two to thirteen; the number of Mexican-Americans from eleven to seventeen; and the number of Republicans from ten to eighteen. In that same period from 1971-1977 the number of women increased from one to ten, including four blacks and one Mexican-American" (McClesky, Butcher, et al. 1978). These changes in Texas' state legislature represent a marked move toward a more diversified state government which is beginning to more evenly reflect the demographics of its citizenry.
North Carolina
Likewise, the construction of North Carolina's state legislature is also changing. According to Jack D. Fleer in describing the North Carolina General Assembly, "The legislative body is no longer dominated by rural, white, Democratic, male, part-time legislators. . ." (1994, p70). African-American representation increased fourfold from 1981-1985. The number of Republican legislators doubled from 1983-1985. The presence of white Democrats fell from sixty-five percent in 1979 to fifty-four percent in 1993. Women gained twenty-nine positions in both the House and Senate from 1971 to 1993 (Fleer 1994, p69). From 1971 to 1991, the number of legal professionals declined from 40% to 20% while those in the business community, specifically real estate, and education grew in number (Fleer 1994, p69).
The growth in diversity of membership is explained in the context that many developments since the mid 1970s ". . . have increased the professional character of the North Carolina General Assembly: a more diverse membership, greater tenure of membership and leadership, more professional staffs, and greater independence from the executive," (Fleer 1994, p66). Clarification is given by illustrating the increased numbers of women, blacks, urban residents, non-lawyers, and Republicans and is a result of court rulings, population shifts, and increased inter-party competition (See: Fleer 1994, p66-70).
Demographic Shifts in the South Carolina General Assembly
From 1970 to 1996, the South Carolina General Assembly witnessed dramatic demographic shifts. As was stated earlier in the paper, Key's view of South Carolina and its form of "legislative government" was indeed led by white, male, rural, Democratic, attorneys from the state. Through the course of our research, however, the data would tend to indicate that over the past two and one-half decades of South Carolina's political history certain shifts have occurred in the physical and ideological composition of each chamber of the General Assembly.
For the sake of basic information, the South Carolina General Assembly is composed of forty-six Senators and one hundred twenty-four members of the House of Representatives. The previous statement is included to merely allow the reader a frame of reference in understanding the varying amounts of change in each legislative chamber.
Senate
Gender
The South Carolina Senate has seen moderate gains for women over the past two and one-half decades as indicated by Graph S-1. In 1970 the Senate was unanimously male. In 1996, however, Chart S-1 illustrates women had acquired three seats in the Senate in a trend of slow gain toward more representation started in 1980 with the victory of the first female candidate.
Race
The information presented in Graph S-2 demonstrates African-Americans have had double the success of women in gaining Senate seats since 1970. In 1996 African-Americans were in control of six Senate seats. The move toward representation for African-Americans appears to have begun in 1984 with one African-American elected. This gain was followed by two more seats in 1986, one in 1988, one in 1990, one in 1992, and one in 1994 as Chart S-1 outlines. While one seat was lost in 1996, the data tend to indicate that African-Americans are gaining ground in the South Carolina State Senate.
Party Affiliation
The state Senate has witnessed sweeping change in the area of party affiliation. In 1970 Republicans held three seats in the Senate. Our data indicates that between 1970 and 1996 there has been a marked increase in Republican representation in the state legislature. In 1996 Republicans were in control of twenty seats in the state Senate, three seats away from equal representation according to the information found in Chart S-1. There appears to be a steady rise in Republican seats from 1981 foreword with intervening periods of dramatic increase. According to our research, in each of the years 1986, 1994, and 1996, Republicans seized an additional four seats, bringing the total to twenty in 1996. These figures would seem to indicate that the Republicans are poised to take the majority of seats in the Senate for the first time since Reconstruction as the slope of Graph S-3 illustrates.
Occupation
The past twenty-six years have also brought significant change in the occupations of South Carolina State Senators. Beginning in 1990 and continuing through 1996 there are no Senators with agricultural areas as their primary occupations, representing a near four percent decrease from 1970. The major area of realignment, however, comes between the occupations of attorney and businessman. In 1970 Attorneys held twenty-nine seats in the Senate, compared to thirteen seats controlled by businessmen.
In 1996, however, this role was reversed with businessmen holding twenty-four seats and attorneys controlling only fifteen. It would appear that businessmen have taken over the role of dominance in the Senate. We feel it is also worthwhile to mention here that the number of "Full-Time/Retired" members in the Senate has increased over the years, which would seem to indicate that the job of legislator has become a larger role in the lives of some of the Senate's members.
Place of Birth
The origin of South Carolina State Senators has also changed somewhat over the past two and one-half decades. In 1970 forty Senators listed South Carolina as their birth place with two listing Georgia, three listing Arkansas, and one listing Mississippi. These numbers changed in 1996 to twenty-nine members listing South Carolina, two North Carolina, two Georgia, one Louisiana, one Illinois, two Wisconsin, and nine with no birth place listed. These numbers seem to indicate that South Carolina is gaining more diversification in its members of the Senate in terms of origin.
House of Representatives
Gender
Much like the Senate, the House of Representatives has been almost completely dominated by males. The data presented in Chart H-1 depicts that in 1970, only one female served as a member of the House. That number has exponentially increased to nineteen female House members in 1996. Research of the 1973 legislative year seems to indicate that as the session female candidates began receiving more success since from that point to 1978 female membership doubled. Women remained steady in their positions holding between eight and ten seats until 1990. At that point, female membership in the House rose to thirteen and has risen each year since.
Race
The House also had a purely Caucasian membership in 1970. In the past two and one-half decades, black membership has increased to over one-fifth of the lower chamber's components. The first black seats were taken in 1973. To 1978, that number increased from three to thirteen. Those thirteen seats remained static until 1983 when black legislators claimed a total of twenty seats. After a decline in representation in the late 1980s and early 1990s, a new increase came in 1994 which has remained at a seemingly steady rate as summarized in Chart H-1 and Graph H-2.
Party Affiliation
Our research seems to demonstrate one of the most radical changes in the South Carolina House of Representatives has been in terms of political party alignment. South Carolina's House of Representatives has been historically Democratically controlled. Our research demonstrates a change in the present-day convention. As Chart H-1 details, since 1970, a year in which the Republican Party held five seats (just under 5% of the total number of Seats in the South Carolina House), Republican officials have increased their ranks to total sixty-five in 1996.
Republicans saw a sharp increase in the election of 1972 as their seats almost doubled, rising from 11 to 21. Between 1973 and 1978, Democrats recaptured eight of the lost seats only to experience a loss of legislative membership from 1978-1996. From that period, Republicans gained an average of approximately four seats per election as Democrats lost almost the converse amount. The Republican members gained control after the election of 1994 as Graph H-3 illustrates.
Occupation
In the discussion of House legislators' occupations, there is a degree of difficulty in interpreting the data. Some members delete their vocation from biographical listing. In this case, as was done with Senate biographies, those individuals are combined to total the "Retired/FT Leg" category of careers as illustrated in Chart H-1.
The occupational trend in the state House seems to be in the same direction of the Senate. Those members of the House who consider themselves employed in an area of agriculture have dropped from 12 to 4 in the twenty-six year period observed. While members with business careers rose from 51 to 59 over the same period, that does not appear to be as drastic a change as the Senate. The significant change in occupation in the House is for the attorneys. Their numbers have decreased from 56 to 23.
As Chart H-1 illustrates, the descent in the amount of representatives within the legal profession has allowed for individuals in other careers to enter the political arena in the legislative branch on the state level. Vocational paths such as education, clergy, student, homemaker, and full-time legislator have all increased over the period studied.
Place of Birth
Much like the state Senate, the House of Representatives has been a governmental body witnessing a constant change in the origin of its members. In 1970, 114 or 92% were native South Carolinians. The remaining ten members were native to other Southern states.
In 1996, the number of native South Carolinians listed in the House dropped to 81 or 65% of total membership. Of the remaining 43 House members, 13 (10%) were born in the South, 6 (5%) Northern states, 21 members or 17% (this includes the one seat vacancy) are not currently available. The other three seats are held by individuals from Border, Midwest, and Western states respectively as detailed in Chart H-1.
Conclusion
Political scientists and authors who write about politics in the South have, as has been stated previously, described legislative composition as white male Democratic attorneys native to the specifically considered state. Although such an idea cannot be proven, the data prior to this study seems to demonstrate the likelihood that it can be considered fact.
States such as North Carolina and Texas appear to have held a similarity to South Carolina in terms of legislative composition. Even trends toward diversity in demographic makeup seem to mirror that of the Palmetto State's General Assembly. Demographic shifts in South Carolina's "legislative government" have, according to the data, demonstrated an inclination toward a system of governmental assembly which reflects change in state populations and ideological characteristics. Minorities, females, and Republicans have each increased membership levels for their respective groups. Also, membership represented by attorneys has risen to levels which, according to the data illustrate a move to non-lawyer legislative majorities. South Carolina has the only state legislature, however, of which we can speak with some level of authority on the issues of demographic changes.
In terms of gender, women in the Senate have gained three seats from 1970 to 1996. This is a rise from no representation to a total of 7% of the Senate's membership. Respectively, in the House, a single female served the body in 1970. In 1996, that number is now nineteen, or 15% of the House membership.
Racial membership seems to have had a more substantial increase in the legislature in comparison to women. Both House and Senate chambers had no blacks serving in the legislature in the 1970 session. House membership has grown to 25 representatives (20%) while Senate standings have increased to 6 (13%).
Political party representation has been the factor with the greatest apparent change. The battle between Democrats and Republicans has, on the state level, existed most heavily in the General Assembly. In 1970 Republicans held three seats (7%) in the Senate. In 1996, that number had increased to 20 (44%). Republican gains in the House were even greater rising from five seats (4%) in 1970 to a majority in 1996 of sixty-five seats (52%). An important variable in the latter years of the House is the Independent. The impact by the Independent on the traditional two-party struggle of Republicans and Democrats is unknown.
The changes in legislative occupations have also demonstrated major shifts. In the 1970 Senate, twenty-nine seats (63%) were held by attorneys. That number dropped to fifteen seats (33%) by 1996. Respectively in the House, fifty-six seats (45%) were controlled by attorneys in 1970. In 1996, that representational construct was reduced to twenty-three (19%). Essentially, during the twenty-six year period studied, non-lawyer legislators grew from a House membership of 68 seats (55%) to one hundred one seats (81%) and in the Senate from seventeen seats (37%) to thirty-one seats (67%). According to the data, the greatest number of non-lawyer legislators has come from some area of the business sector. In the Senate, business people have increased from thirteen (28%) to twenty-four (52%). In the House, business areas have risen from 51 (41%) to 59 (48%).
Although the General Assembly still is composed of a majority of native South Carolinians, individuals from other parts of the nation have come to the state and created successful bids for office. From 1970 to 1996 native South Carolinians in the Senate decreased from 40 (87%) to 29 (63%). The same event occurred in the House of Representatives as South Carolina natives lowered their control as membership declined from 114 (92%) to 81 (65%).
In a context larger than charts and graphs, what does the preceding information mean? Over the twenty-six year period covered by this study, the inarguable reality is that the policies emanating from the Statehouse on Assembly Street in Columbia have changed. Bills and resolutions which originate in the General Assembly each session have, if only by votes of passage or failure, acted as gauges to illustrate the shifting demographic composition of the South Carolina House of Representatives and Senate. During the time studied, 1970-1996, there have been increased amounts of legislation favoring more conservative and "pro-business" policies as well as larger numbers of votes on legislation favoring women and minorities.
As noted earlier, there are slight lags within the period studied. Even with these minor gaps, we do believe the information presented is wholly sufficient to demonstrate trends of change in the demographic areas of race, gender, political parties, places of birth, and professional occupation. Although we believe our records to be accurate, this information is presented to the reader to both challenge and research further.
Works Cited
Fleer, Jack D. 1994. North Carolina Government and Politics. University of Nebraska Press; Lincoln, Nebraska.
Graham, Cole Blease Jr. and William V. Moore. 1994. South Carolina Government and Politics. University of Nebraska Press; Lincoln, Nebraska.
Key, V.O. Jr. 1949. Southern Politics in State and Nation. Random House; New York.
McClesky, Clifton, Allen Butcher et al. The Government and Politics of Texas-6 ed. Little, Brown and Co.; Boston
South Carolina Legislative Manual. 1970-1996.Columbia: Legislative Printing and Technology Resources.